Samantha Power addresses U.S. policy on genocide
Nov. 16, 2005
ELON
By Brian Grady student
Samantha Power, who won the 2003 Pulitzer Prize for General Nonfiction for her book, “A Problem From Hell: America and the Age of Genocide,” discussed U.S. policy toward genocide during a lecture Nov. 14 [...].
[...] Power explored several cases of genocide that occurred during the 20th century, and explained the similarity in U.S. response during events such as the Holocaust and in places as diverse as Armenia, [...] has varied from such strategies as simply denouncing genocide up to and including use of military force. Power argued that the factor that has most often determined the level of U.S. response has been U.S. strategic and economic interest.
[...]
“When people are dying, the best reason, and sometimes the only reason, to deal with these cases is because they’re dying.”
[...]
Power said that many in the U.S. learned from its failures in the past, and believes that grassroots organizations and churches have been especially effective in bringing attention to more recent instances of human rights abuses. However, she said that the war in Iraq and the Bush administration’s aggressive foreign policy and mishandling of domestic situations like Hurricane Katrina are ultimately detrimental to U.S. prestige and power in the world.
“We’re in a moment now where U.S. influence is greatly reduced, not just because of Iraq, but because of a number of other factors,” she said. “Without U.S. leadership, it is not clear who will step up and ensure that genocide is left in the 20th century.”
[...]
Note: Above are excerpts from the article. The full article appears here. Clarifications and comments by me are contained in {}. Deletions are marked by [...]. The bold emphasis is mine.
ELON
By Brian Grady student
Samantha Power, who won the 2003 Pulitzer Prize for General Nonfiction for her book, “A Problem From Hell: America and the Age of Genocide,” discussed U.S. policy toward genocide during a lecture Nov. 14 [...].
[...] Power explored several cases of genocide that occurred during the 20th century, and explained the similarity in U.S. response during events such as the Holocaust and in places as diverse as Armenia, [...] has varied from such strategies as simply denouncing genocide up to and including use of military force. Power argued that the factor that has most often determined the level of U.S. response has been U.S. strategic and economic interest.
[...]
“When people are dying, the best reason, and sometimes the only reason, to deal with these cases is because they’re dying.”
[...]
Power said that many in the U.S. learned from its failures in the past, and believes that grassroots organizations and churches have been especially effective in bringing attention to more recent instances of human rights abuses. However, she said that the war in Iraq and the Bush administration’s aggressive foreign policy and mishandling of domestic situations like Hurricane Katrina are ultimately detrimental to U.S. prestige and power in the world.
“We’re in a moment now where U.S. influence is greatly reduced, not just because of Iraq, but because of a number of other factors,” she said. “Without U.S. leadership, it is not clear who will step up and ensure that genocide is left in the 20th century.”
[...]
Note: Above are excerpts from the article. The full article appears here. Clarifications and comments by me are contained in {}. Deletions are marked by [...]. The bold emphasis is mine.
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home